Diamonds are forever, but what about diamond-ring guarantees? A couple has become frustrated with a poorly-designed ring that keeps ditching its diamonds. Here’s their story:
“My husband bought me a diamond ring for my birthday last year (Dec. 2008).
August of this year I lost the big diamond at my brother’s wedding reception – luckily the hotel staff FOUND IT right before they were about to vacuum. Lucky me. We brought the ring in thinking it was a freak accident and it wouldn’t happen again. 3 weeks later I lost another diamond – not the big one but a smaller diamond. We brought it in again and it was replaced. [The] company tells us ‘there is a lifetime warranty on the ring’ so the diamond was replaced and the ring was fixed. Well guess what happened? About a month later I lost the same diamond AGAIN. They replaced it – because like their policy states ‘the lifetime of the ring.’
“My husband went in livid and asked them to repair it and asked them why this keeps happening – they told us it was how the ring was designed. They will not give us our money back nor will they let us return the ring for the price it was purchased for – they want us to double the price of the ring.
“So my question is; they are really haphazard with explaining to us how long the “lifetime” of the ring is. Is that 1 year? Is that 4 years? Are they going to keep replacing these diamonds that are falling out with no repercussions? They are losing so much money on this ring yet won’t work with us to make sure we have a quality product. What happens if I want to pass this ring on to my child someday – will they still continue to replace the diamonds?”
What’s the responsibility of the jeweler in this situation? Should the couple just count their diamond-studded blessings?
More from Star Tribune
More from Whistleblower
The Whistleblower column and blog are shutting down, but our commitment remains to investigating tips from readers.
A Baltimore couple and their company were ordered to pay back $616,000 to Spanish-speaking immigrants for immigration services that they were neither qualified nor authorized to provide, the Federal Trade Commission announced last week.
A company that labeled millions of Facebook users as a "jerk" or "not a jerk" is facing federal scrutiny after the agency said it improperly obtained information to create user profiles.
CenterPoint agreed last week to pay at least $192,500 to settle a lawsuit filed by the City of Minneapolis and various insurance companies after a gas explosion near a south Minneapolis Cub Foods in 2011.
A company accused of "mortgage scams" spent at least $2 million for a direct-mail campaign aimed at Minnesota veterans, according to the Minnesota Department of Commerce.
Recommended For You
Hillary Clinton vigorously defended her family's foundation against Donald Trump's criticism on Friday and declared she's confident there will be no major further accusations involving the foundation, her emails or anything else that could undermine her chances of defeating him in November.
Obliging a donor is not necessarily criminal, but if you're in a role that would seem to call for the utmost care in avoiding the perception of favoritism …
The Twins, in Toronto tonight on a seven-game losing streak, will need to fight to avoid 100 losses. Manager Paul Molitor wants to make sure the Twins have that fight in them.
Money to keep project going would come from Met Council, Hennepin County, metro transit board.
A strike by nurses at five Allina Health hospitals will start at 7 a.m. Labor Day, according to required 10-day notices their union sent to the health system early this morning.